So to be clear you are saying the Derps have the evidence to get Biden out and restore Trump to his rightful power but have no intention to ever present it. To make the case themselves?

The only way it will get presented is if those who do not support Trump take them to court to force them to present it.


Do you not see the flaw in that approach? That if you are waiting for the 'winner' to contest his own win that is unlikely to happen??

Do you think the Derps are actually dumb enough to think that would be a good strategy?

You and i have one singular dispute and that is based on your claim that Russiagate is a CT and comparable to the Riggie stuff.

You have been humiliated in that claim.

If you want to argue any Investigation was not justified you do not make that case by cherry picking what you think in the evidence was BS or a bad lead. For instance in a high profile murder investigation the Police may get hundreds or even thousands of complete garbage, laughable leads. But then they may get 2 very credible leads that they follow that lead to convictions.

It is the credible leads that justify the Investigations and no amount of pointing at what you think were laughable or poor leads changes that fact.

The George P stuff alone had all the merit required to justify the investigation and once engaged it lead to real findings of criminality. It was presented in various courts of law many indictments and convictions were garnered which verified the mandate of that investigation as proper and just.

Complete opposite of the Riggie stuff were only laughable claims were made then instantly retracted in court and then as soon as they stepped out of the court they made the claims again.

He leaves out some pertinent things from what I've seen. Whether it's on purpose or for some other reason I don't know. And he agrees that the interference happened from what I've read anyway. Maybe the intellectual thing is another version of guys getting older and wishing they served in the military

IDK = I don't know.

You're welcome.

I can see you have attempted to cite a reputable source for your interpretation of the AZ "audit". The fact still remains that even the Cyber Ninjas own recount shows that Trump is the loser and that voter fraud is a non-issue.

Specifically I asked you for a reference for proof there were 17K DUPLICATE BALLOTS. You would think the Republicans would be taking THAT claim to court ASAP.

Proof! or ban

The non disclosure agreement signed by the volunteers at the AZ audit has been lifted.

Here is their story.

https://rumble.com/vn5215-az-audit-v...ities-dis.html

They're probably all Trump Derps so you can safely ignore them.

I cited you testimony from an MIT PhD in front of a US senate hearing in AZ.

What more do you want? The actual ballots mailed to you?

This video explains why a recount doesn't uncover fraud in some instances. It is a very detailed explanation.

https://rumble.com/vn5215-az-audit-v...ities-dis.html

A biological engineering PhD who's previous wild election fraud claims were disputed by actual election experts who are professors (not just lowly PhDs) from MIT and Harvard.

I thought the core of the case about election fraud was the tweet about it, specifically that the tweet was deleted by Twitter. He claims the deletion was at the behest of a Government official.

“In testimony we showed that the government has a Trusted Twitter Partnership, a special portal that they can report on U.S. citizens when they expose violations of law by government officials,” he said.

But thats a side show IMO. I don't think anyone really doubts this at this stage. Not really.

Shame there does not exist any records of a tweet that gets deleted (if it ever existed), especially if that is the sole reason that all the krakens could not actually present proper cases in court to show actual evidence. Damn that spooky Trusted Twitter Partnership!!

Seriously, how much money and time have you donated to these derps after they cultivated you so well? Also, when is the Pope going to be arrested. Seems quite overdue at this point.

All the best.

The point is he's crazy. That he got a PhD from MIT in a completely unrelated field to the one we are talking about is not all that relevant, especially when it's trivially easy to find better credentialed sane people who tell you why he doesn't understand what's going on.. I don't think anybody really doubts the fact that 2020 election fraud claims are bogus anymore. Only half of republicans ever believed it and I'm guessing it will go down after the clownishness of the audits.

A good chunk of politicians who "believed" it did it for show because a good chunk of their base are actual genuine derp believers. Just a variant of the grift, but more standard politics.

The US Senate or the AZ Senate?

If he had proof they were double counted.... then he needs to proceed to a court case (AND WOULD!!!). Any...I say ANY Republican based group would happily fund a court challenge is there was any validity from this CT huckster.


So in a way, he has disproved his own findings.


Your source is not valid unless he can prove his claims in court.

You are insiting a supposedly deleted Tweet due to spooky reasons and a thread on rumble.com are not a substitute for proving a case in court? Well, you certainly are not going to make money on this grift gravy train!

I don't understand why you think your beliefs are some sort of bulwark against Trump destroying the country.

You seem to think that it is imperative for people to pick a side. They either have to believe everything dumb theory that was every floated n the media about Russia and the 2016 election or they have accept the idea that dumb reporting about pee tapes is just as harmful to society as the POTUS alleging that a U.S. presidential election was straight-up rigged.

Those aren't even two sides of the same coin. And you haven't come close to explaining why people who reject both positions are "refusing to take a stand one way or the other."

In any case, I'm quite sure that we exhausted any possibility of convincing each other, so I guess we should just move on.

Then there's the whole I reject both sides--leaving behind the most partisan on each side which can deepen the polarization

It’s people like bingo that permits political organisation like communist China to stay in power with false claim of justice being accepted …

To be clear on this, Crowdstrike didn't admit that they had no evidence, they admitted that their evidence was purely circumstantial. On the other hand there is no evidence at all, circumstantial or otherwise, supporting any other theory as to the leak.

That doesn't mean that it definitely was Russia but the lack of evidence for any other theory plus the fact that there is very strong evidence that there was a disinformation campaign that faked data specifically to make it look like the leak was not from Russia means that personally I'm happy to say that it probably was.

There was obviously some ridiculous reporting going on around Russiagate but the idea that the topic as a whole is even remotely similar in any way to the riggie claims is absurd.

Well Russiagate is literally, definitionally, a conspiracy theory. It's like the Riggie stuff because it also has no supporting fact base while assertions made in support of the conspiracy theory made by elites in either case are touted as facts by the minions of the respective camps. I have given you many examples of these for Russiagate. You always respond by simply repeating the unsupported assertions. I am starting to think you just don't understand what evidence is or it's relation to truth. You think a job title or an institution gives claims their truth value- that's incorrect and you should know it's incorrect because of how many times those same authorities have to go back and later admit that what they said wasn't true.

You are learning from your masters how to just keep asserting. While you don't have their authority to give assertions the force of truth like they do, you, as an individual, aren't capable of spouting out as many lies as they do either. I am honestly indifferent as to weighing the claim of a rando internet guy vs. the CIA. The rando guy might be dumb and nutty, but the CIA has an incomparable reputation for dishonesty, just fuming the globe with poisonous lies.


That's a similar pattern to Russiagate. An anonymous leak would be made from an intelligence agency, the content would be sensationalized in the mainstream media and Democrats in government, and then it would be later retracted or revised albeit with a lot less fanfare. Every week it was "the net is closing" but nothing ever materialized and it didn't need to because the smear was the point. You'd have to have amnesia or completely unengaged not to remember that, the same pattern as the My Pillow guy. Your My Pillow guy was Rachel Maddow. And the unraveling is still happening. We just saw another claim against Russia, that it was behind the Hunter Biden laptop story, proven false. Hillary's lawyer was just charged with lying when disclosing a tip on some other story which itself was a lie.

And just like the Trumpers you either are too stupid to see what is going on or you do see and are willing to play this dangerous game of charades like you have some death with for our democracy.

Taibbi style stuff--People have -speculated- trump -may- have been compromised back in the 80s--that's outrageous. All that happened was some Russian official stopped by trump tower--then a little while later he took a trip to Russia. end of story folks. But leaves out how soon after he came back he took out a string of full page ads in multiple major papers(with no real precedent for doing anything like that) that could easily be construed as being pro-Russia. Just normal trump stuff. It's crazy talk to speculate like that

people nod in agreement--then get back to their hillary eats babies/has a serial killer hobby light reading.

I had friends in hs that went to Russia for school trips back then--just random kids--and even they had the life scared out of them over there for silly ****

Just another one of these "I can see the pattern" guys trying to teach the sheeple how to see and learn. Has he opined Which elites are behind it all?

It is quite impressive that the case for the big lie is so weak that lawyers taking it to court lose not just the case, but also their license to practice law.

Justifiably so.

Here are some statements made under oath from crowdstrike I cited earlier ITT:

I consider the claim by Wikileaks that they didn't get the emails from the Russians as evidence. They have a well deserved reputation for telling the truth, and when you are truly adversarial to power you can't be caught lying once. Maddow lied to your faces for years and you guys can't wait to hear more, but Wikileaks is held to a much, much higher standard. They are risking their reputation on their claim.


You can't just say there was no viable explanation so therefore there isn't any reason not to blame whoever we want. That's just not reasonable thinking. You need some affirmative evidence here, especially in light of Assange saying he is 1000% sure it wasn't the Russians.

The emails were embarrassing for Clinton because they revealed truths about her. So the media focus was immediately on who did it, instead of the content, in order to distract attention and tie it to Trump somehow. It's absurd. It's like telling a story about how someone else possibly farted inappropriately on some occasion after you just **** your pants in a crowded elevator.

They are both lie-based conspiracy theories that constantly fall apart. They are both intended as campaigns to overturn legitimate elections (legitimate by our poor standards at least). Both have a "tune in next week for when the real, real evidence drops and the net closes in" vibe. All that has been established is that Russia was poking around at the headquarters of a political party which has sought to turn the world against them and threatened them with nuclear annihilation going on 80 years now.